TEHRAN (FNA)- Prominent American lawyer and legal expert Marjorie Cohn says that the United States is moving in the direction of becoming a police state that adheres to no legal principle and eavesdrops on its own citizens furtively.

According to Cohn, the US government is suppressing such whistleblowers as Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden to prevent the American citizens from being aware of what is not usually told them by the mass media.

“The United States is moving in the direction of becoming a police state with indefinite detention of people without charging them with a crime; conducting massive surveillance without probable cause or individualized suspicion; and targeted killing with drones off the battlefield based on vague suspicion of terrorist activity,” said Prof. Cohn in an exclusive interview with Fars News Agency.

Marjorie Cohn is a professor of law at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law, San Diego, California, and a former president of the National Lawyers Guild. She lectures globally on the international law, human rights and the US foreign policy. Prof. Cohn is a news consultant with the CBS News and her commentaries have been broadcast by BBC, CNN, NPR, MSNBC, Fox News and Pacifica Radio. Marjorie Cohn is the author of several books, including “Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law” and the co-author of “Cameras in the Courtroom: Television and the Pursuit of Justice.”

FNA has conducted an interview with Prof. Cohn regarding the legal aspects of the US military expeditions, the US government’s campaign against the whistleblowers, humanitarian intervention as a customary practice of the United States military-industrial complex and some regional issues as the Syrian crisis and the anti-Iran sanctions. What follows is the text of the interview.

Q: You’ve written about the legal aspects of the revelations made by the former NSA contractor Edward Snowden that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ordered Verizon communications company to monitor the phone calls of its users and collect the telephony metadata created by Verizon for communications. Would you please explain about the legality of this order? Is it compliant with the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution and the people’s privacy and civil liberties?

A: The Order violates the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, which requires that the police obtain a warrant from a judge based on probable cause the person is committing a crime. The metadata is being collected without any showing of individualized suspicion.

Q: Can the US government use the pretext of the Espionage Act of 1917 to silence the whistleblowers such as Bradley Manning and prevent the free flow of information in the mass media? Do you consider the US government’s treatment of Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden fair and just?

A: The Obama administration has targeted several whistleblowers under the Espionage Act. But whistle-blowing is not what the Espionage Act was aimed at. The administration is trying to make examples of Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden in order to discourage other whistleblowers from coming forward with information the US public should know. This does not constitute a fair administration of justice.

Q: Some political analysts and scholars have made the argument that the United States has moved toward becoming a police state, especially following the 9/11 attacks, through establishing the Department of Homeland Security, ratifying the PATRIOT Act, allowing the extrajudicial searches and seizures and suppressing social movements such as the Occupy Wall Street. What’s your take on that?

A: The United States is moving in the direction of becoming a police state with indefinite detention of people without charging them with a crime; conducting massive surveillance without probable cause or individualized suspicion; and targeted killing with drones off the battlefield based on vague suspicion of terrorist activity, just to name a few.

Q: The United States government has repeatedly threatened Iran with a military strike, and President Obama has stated that “all options are on the table” with regard to Iran’s nuclear program. This is while Iran has never posed any threat to the United States and never taken any action to harm the US national security or the interests. Can we say that the United States has violated the UN Charter by threatening Iran with a military attack? If so, then who is responsible for holding the United States accountable and investigating the violation?

A: By threatening the use of force, the US government is violating the UN Charter. It is highly unlikely that high government officials will ever be brought to justice, including officials of the Bush administration for torture and prosecuting illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The only chance for accountability is under “universal jurisdiction,” where a country can prosecute foreign nationals for the most heinous crimes when that foreign national’s government is unable or unwilling to bring its national to justice.

Q: As you note in one of your articles, the United States used cluster bombs, depleted uranium, and white phosphorous gas in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and the use of such materials and weapons are illegal according to several internationally-recognized conventions. But the United Nations Security Council, the International Criminal Court and other human rights organizations have never reacted to this illegal conduct. What’s the reason in your view?

A: Since the United States can veto any resolution passed by the Security Council, the council has not condemned the US for its use of these inhumane weapons. Prosecutions in the International Criminal Court have been limited, for the most part, to leaders of African countries, perhaps because that is less controversial than prosecuting US officials.

Q: What’s your viewpoint on the notion of “humanitarian intervention” and the fact that some world powers “feel obliged” to wage wars and militarily intervene in other countries to allegedly promote humanitarian objectives and prevent the leaders of these countries from “killing their own citizens?” Do you find this idea justifiable?

A: Today “humanitarian intervention” is called “Responsibility to Protect,” or “R2P.” R2P is not enshrined in an international treaty nor is it a norm of customary international law. The UN Charter requires countries to settle their disputes by peaceful means. No country can use military force against another country except in self-defense or when the Security Council approves the attack. R2P is a slippery slope because it will be the powerful countries that decide when the people of another country need protecting. The powerful countries can use this as a guise to maintain geopolitical hegemony or engage in illegal regime change.

Q: Let’s talk about the crisis in Syria. The United States has clearly taken sides in the bloody civil war in the Arab country and is funneling arms and weapons to the rebels and insurgents who find the killing of defenseless civilians the most important part of their modus operandi. Why doesn’t the US government take steps to help with the sustainable resolution of the Syrian conflict? Why has it excluded Iran from the talks for finding a peaceful way to end the civil war in Syria?

A: Fortunately, Russia – and US public opinion – stopped the Obama administration from using military force in Syria, which would have been illegal and made the situation much worse. There is a dispute about whether it was the Assad government or opposition forces, who used the chemical weapons. The US government is primarily interested in stability, in order to protect foreign investment. In order to appease the Israeli government, the US government is taking a very tough line on Iran.

Q: And finally, as a professional lawyer and legal expert, what do you think about the legality of the US and EU unilateral sanctions against Iran which are imposed outside the framework of the UN Security Council?

TEHRAN (FNA)- The Syrian army units seized a large bomb-making workshop of the terrorists as well as an advanced and fully equipped hospital and a big drug store used by the terrorists groups in the newly-liberated al-Sakhour district in Eastern Aleppo. [VIDEO]

TEHRAN (FNA)- Syrian government troops patrol Aleppo's al-Shaar neighborhood after taking control of the area in the Eastern part of the city preparing a safe passage for the extraction of civilians. [PHOTOS]

TEHRAN (FNA)- Human Rights Watch is wasting its time to call for an arms embargo on Saudi Arabia over its atrocious aerial bombardment campaign against Yemen. The West won't terminate its alliance with the most prolific arms buyer.

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Chargé d'Affaires to Switzerland Mehdi Abedi voiced his optimism about the prospects of trade relations between Iran and Switzerland, saying that the two countries' economic ties are entering a new phase of cooperation.

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Ground Force Commander Brigadier General Kioumars Heidari announced on Friday that his forces are preparing to stage major military exercises in the Southeastern parts of the country to enhance their combat preparedness.

TEHRAN (FNA)- The US’ decision to ease restrictions on military aid for foreign forces and other fighters supporting the US in Syria is unlikely to affect the situation in Eastern Aleppo, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at an OSCE Ministerial Council in Hamburg.